Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background The growing demand for LTC (Long-term care) services for disabled elderly has become a daunting task for countries worldwide, especially China, where population aging is particularly severe. According to CSY (China Statistical Yearbook,2019), the elderly aged 65 or above has reached 167 million in 2018, and the number of disabled elderly is as high as 54%. Germany and other countries have alleviated the crisis by promoting the public LTCI (Long-Term Care Insurance) system since the 1990s, while China’s public LTCI system formal pilot only started in 2016. Therefore, the development of the public LTCI system has gradually become a hot topic for scholars in various countries, including China. Methods This review has been systematically sorted the existing related literature to discuss the development of public LTCI (Long-Term Care Insurance)system form four aspects, namely, the comparison of public LTCI systems in different countries, the influence of public LTCI, challenge of public LTCI, and the relationship between public LTCI and private LTCI. We searched some databases including Web of Science Core Collection, Medline, SCOPUS, EBSCO, EMBASE, ProQuest and PubMed from January 2008 to September 2020. The quality of 38 quantitative and 21 qualitative articles was evaluated using the CASP(Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) critical evaluation checklist. Results The review systematically examines the development of public LTCI system from four aspects, namely, the comparison of public LTCI systems in different countries, the influence of public LTCI, the challenge of public LTCI, and the relationship between public LTCI and private LTCI. For example, LTCI has a positive effect on the health and life quality of the disabled elderly. However, the role of LTCI in alleviating the financial burden on families with the disabled elderly may be limited. Conclusion Some policy implications on the future development of China’s LTCI system can be obtained. For example, the government should fully consider the constraints such as price rise, the elderly disability rate, and the substantial economic burden. It also can strengthen the effective combination of public LTCI and private LTCI. It does not only help to expand the space for its theoretical research but also to learn the experiences in the practice of the LTCI system in various countries around the world. It will significantly help the smooth development and further promote the in-depth reform of the LTCI system in China.

Fall-related injuries exert an enormous health burden on older adults in long-term care (LTC). Softer landing surfaces, such as those provided by low-stiffness \"compliant\" flooring, may prevent fall-related injuries by decreasing the forces applied to the body during fall impact. Our primary objective was to assess the clinical effectiveness of compliant flooring at preventing serious fall-related injuries among LTC residents. The Flooring for Injury Prevention (FLIP) Study was a 4-year, randomized superiority trial in 150 single-occupancy resident rooms at a single Canadian LTC site. In April 2013, resident rooms were block randomized (1:1) to installation of intervention compliant flooring (2.54 cm SmartCells) or rigid control flooring (2.54 cm plywood) covered with identical hospital-grade vinyl. The primary outcome was serious fall-related injury over 4 years that required an emergency department visit or hospital admission and a treatment procedure or diagnostic evaluation in hospital. Secondary outcomes included minor fall-related injury, any fall-related injury, falls, and fracture. Outcomes were ascertained by blinded assessors between September 1, 2013 and August 31, 2017 and analyzed by intention to treat. Adverse outcomes were not assessed. During follow-up, 184 residents occupied 74 intervention rooms, and 173 residents occupied 76 control rooms. Residents were 64.3% female with mean (SD) baseline age 81.7 (9.5) years (range 51.1 to 104.6 years), body mass index 25.9 (7.7) kg/m2, and follow-up 1.64 (1.39) years. 1,907 falls were reported; 23 intervention residents experienced 38 serious injuries (from 29 falls in 22 rooms), while 23 control residents experienced 47 serious injuries (from 34 falls in 23 rooms). Compliant flooring did not affect odds of ≥1 serious fall-related injury (12.5% intervention versus 13.3% control, odds ratio [OR]: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.84, p = 0.950) or ≥2 serious fall-related injuries (5.4% versus 7.5%, OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.31 to 1.75, p = 0.500). Compliant flooring did not affect rate of serious fall-related injuries (0.362 versus 0.422 per 1,000 bed nights, rate ratio [RR]: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.45 to 2.39, p = 0.925; 0.038 versus 0.053 per fall, RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.38 to 1.71, p = 0.560), rate of falls with ≥1 serious fall-related injury (0.276 versus 0.303 per 1,000 bed nights, RR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.79, p = 0.920), or time to first serious fall-related injury (0.237 versus 0.257, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.62, p = 0.760). Compliant flooring did not affect any secondary outcome in this study. Study limitations included the following: findings were specific to 2.54 cm SmartCells compliant flooring installed in LTC resident rooms, standard fall and injury prevention interventions were in use throughout the study and may have influenced the observed effect of compliant flooring, and challenges with concussion detection in LTC residents may have prevented estimation of the effect of compliant flooring on fall-related concussions. In contrast to results from previous retrospective and nonrandomized studies, this study found that compliant flooring underneath hospital-grade vinyl was not effective at preventing serious fall-related injuries in LTC. Future studies are needed to identify effective methods for preventing fall-related injuries in LTC. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01618786.

This article describes the public health impact of Alzheimer's disease (AD), including prevalence and incidence, mortality and morbidity, use and costs of care and the ramifications of AD for family caregivers, the dementia workforce and society. The Special Report discusses the larger health care system for older adults with cognitive issues, focusing on the role of caregivers and non‐physician health care professionals. An estimated 6.9 million Americans age 65 and older are living with Alzheimer's dementia today. This number could grow to 13.8 million by 2060, barring the development of medical breakthroughs to prevent or cure AD. Official AD death certificates recorded 119,399 deaths from AD in 2021. In 2020 and 2021, when COVID‐19 entered the ranks of the top ten causes of death, Alzheimer's was the seventh‐leading cause of death in the United States. Official counts for more recent years are still being compiled. Alzheimer's remains the fifth‐leading cause of death among Americans age 65 and older. Between 2000 and 2021, deaths from stroke, heart disease and HIV decreased, whereas reported deaths from AD increased more than 140%. More than 11 million family members and other unpaid caregivers provided an estimated 18.4 billion hours of care to people with Alzheimer's or other dementias in 2023. These figures reflect a decline in the number of caregivers compared with a decade earlier, as well as an increase in the amount of care provided by each remaining caregiver. Unpaid dementia caregiving was valued at$346.6 billion in 2023. Its costs, however, extend to unpaid caregivers’ increased risk for emotional distress and negative mental and physical health outcomes. Members of the paid health care and broader community‐based workforce are involved in diagnosing, treating and caring for people with dementia. However, the United States faces growing shortages across different segments of the dementia care workforce due to a combination of factors, including the absolute increase in the number of people living with dementia. Therefore, targeted programs and care delivery models will be needed to attract, better train and effectively deploy health care and community‐based workers to provide dementia care. Average per‐person Medicare payments for services to beneficiaries age 65 and older with AD or other dementias are almost three times as great as payments for beneficiaries without these conditions, and Medicaid payments are more than 22 times as great. Total payments in 2024 for health care, long‐term care and hospice services for people age 65 and older with dementia are estimated to be $ 360 billion. The Special Report investigates how caregivers of older adults with cognitive issues interact with the health care system and examines the role non‐physician health care professionals play in facilitating clinical care and access to community‐based services and supports. It includes surveys of caregivers and health care workers, focusing on their experiences, challenges, awareness and perceptions of dementia care navigation.

In this first person narrative, Bette Ann Moskowitz tells what it is like to be a volunteer long-term care ombudsman, and how, with thirty-six hours of training, she entered the unfamiliar world of a nursing home to advocate for its almost three-hundred residents.

Long-term care (LTC) must be carefully delineated when expenditures are compared across countries because how LTC services are defined and delivered differ in each country. LTC’s objectives are to compensate for functional decline and mitigate the care burden of the family. Governments have tended to focus on the poor but Germany opted to make LTC universally available in 1995/1996. The applicant’s level of dependence is assessed by the medical team of the social insurance plan. Japan basically followed this model but, unlike Germany where those eligible may opt for cash benefits, they are limited to services. Benefits are set more generously in Japan because, prior to its implementation in 2000, health insurance had covered long-stays in hospitals and there had been major expansions of social services. These service levels had to be maintained and be made universally available for all those meeting the eligibility criteria. As a result, efforts to contain costs after the implementation of the LTC Insurance have had only marginal effects. This indicates it would be more efficient and equitable to introduce public LTC Insurance at an early stage before benefits have expanded as a result of ad hoc policy decisions.

Objective To examine the costs and cost effectiveness of telehealth in addition to standard support and treatment, compared with standard support and treatment. Design Economic evaluation nested in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial.Setting Community based telehealth intervention in three local authority areas in England.Participants 3230 people with a long term condition (heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or diabetes) were recruited into the Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth trial between May 2008 and December 2009. Of participants taking part in the Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study examining acceptability, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness, 845 were randomised to telehealth and 728 to usual care.Interventions Intervention participants received a package of telehealth equipment and monitoring services for 12 months, in addition to the standard health and social care services available in their area. Controls received usual health and social care.Main outcome measure Primary outcome for the cost effectiveness analysis was incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Results We undertook net benefit analyses of costs and outcomes for 965 patients (534 receiving telehealth; 431 usual care). The adjusted mean difference in QALY gain between groups at 12 months was 0.012. Total health and social care costs (including direct costs of the intervention) for the three months before 12 month interview were £1390 (€1610; $2150) and £1596 for the usual care and telehealth groups, respectively. Cost effectiveness acceptability curves were generated to examine decision uncertainty in the analysis surrounding the value of the cost effectiveness threshold. The incremental cost per QALY of telehealth when added to usual care was £92 000. With this amount, the probability of cost effectiveness was low (11% at willingness to pay threshold of £30 000; >50% only if the threshold exceeded about £90 000). In sensitivity analyses, telehealth costs remained slightly (non-significantly) higher than usual care costs, even after assuming that equipment prices fell by 80% or telehealth services operated at maximum capacity. However, the most optimistic scenario (combining reduced equipment prices with maximum operating capacity) eliminated this group difference (cost effectiveness ratio £12 000 per QALY).Conclusions The QALY gain by patients using telehealth in addition to usual care was similar to that by patients receiving usual care only, and total costs associated with the telehealth intervention were higher. Telehealth does not seem to be a cost effective addition to standard support and treatment.Trial registration ISRCTN43002091.